they are poor self-defense weapons. it is hard to maneuver in the home, and projectiles are propelled of such a rate they are likely to pose dangers and who people as they go through walls, endangering family members or neighbors. if that is right, assault weapons would not be thought to be within the scope of the second amendment, and yet i should admit we talked extensively that there are some reasonable arguments you could make against an assault weapons ban. an assault weapons ban by one meaning says the gun is in common use if used for any lawful purpose, and if that is the case they are generally used for unlawful purposes. an assault weapons ban might not satisfy the demands, might not further the government's interest in public safety, given that they are rarely used in crime, and the law adopted now mirrors and now the 1994 assault weapons to iran, and that was notorious -- assault weapons ban, that was notorious for loopholes. i think the government could have difficulty defending such a law. i should say the